ABSTRACT

Cox, K . S . A Formula Deve lo~ed f o r the P red ic t ion o f Residual Vol~une of Female Subiects While Immersed. M.S. i n Physical Education Human Perfornlance, 1989. 48 pp. (R.C. Green)

The c l o s e d - c i r c u i t oxygen d i l u t i o n technique was used t o measure r e s i d u a l volume (RV) i n 100 female Ss , age 10 t o 56, while sea t ed on land (RV dry) and while immersed t o the neck (RV wet) . There was a s i g - n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e (gC.05) between RV wet and RV dry . A p red ic t ion formula f o r determining RV was developed by r eg res s ing smoking h i s t o r y (SH) and t h e phys ica l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of age , c h e s t depth (CD), height (HT), weight (WT), and ches t di.ameter ( C D I ) a g a i n s t RV wet. CDI and S1i were no t s i g n i f i c a n t ( ~ < . 0 5 ) p red ic to r s of RV and, subsequently were n o t included i n the f i n a l p red ic t ion formula. Through the use of a s tep-wise mul t ip l e r eg res s ion process , the fo l lowing p red ic t ion formula was developed: 0.0176556(AGE) + 0.0399657(CDa + 0.0149732 (HT) - 0.00747103(\JT) - 2.20767. The a r i a t i o n (R ) a t t r i b u t e d t o the indep- Y endent v a r i a b l e s was . 0 . This R was higher than t h a t repor teg by Crapo e t a l . (1982) (R4-.48) and Goldman and Becklake (1959) (R - .30 ) . The s t anda rd e r r o r o f e s t ima te (S.E.E.) f o r t h i s p r e d i c t i o n formula was 148 ml. This S.E.E. was l e s s than t h a t repor ted by Crapo e t a l . (1982), (S.E.E.-381 ml ) , Goldman and Becklake (1959) (S.E.E.=360 ml.), and Grimby and Soderholm (1963) (S.E.E.=326 ml). Using the d a t a obta ined from t h i s s tudy , t h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e rence ( ~ < . 0 5 ) between RV determin- ed from previously publ ished s t u d i e s (Prev RV) and RV determined from the newly developed formula (New RV). There was a l s o a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r - ence (g<.05) between Prev RV and RV wet.

A Formula Developed for the Predi.ction of Residual Volume of Female Subjects While Immersed

A Thesis Presented

to

The Graduate Faculty

University of Wisconsin - La Crosse

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the

Master of Science Degree

by

Kathleen S. Cox

May, 1989

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN - LA CROSSE College of Health, Physical Education and Recreation

La Crosse. Wisconsin 54601

Candidate: Kathleen S. Cox

We recommend acceptance of this thesis in partial fulfillment

of this candidate's requirements for the degree:

Master of Science in Physical Education Human Performance.

The candidate has completed her oral report.

5--/b -sp i

Thesis Committee ~haiherson Date

c. -&*/-&c- //n. /9 f9 - TI&sfi Committee Member Mate

This thesis is approved for the College of Health, Physical Education and Recreation.

h!l& rf%L' a & Dean, College of Health, Physical Education

v # $ f -&,&A- 2734. / Y ~ Y D n of Graduate Studies ~at'6

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge the following people:

To Dr. Richard Green for his superb guidance and exceptional dedica-

tion in helping prepare this thesis. His input was invaluable.

To Dr. John Unbehaun for his clear and thorough explanations of the

statistical processing. He was generous with his time, always willing

to answer my many questions.

To Dr. Joy Greenlee for her practical statistical explanations. She

helped me design and conduct the investigation appropriately.

To Mr. Jeff Tesch for hfs technical expertise and willingness to put

aside his own work when I needed him the most.

To all of those people who participated as subjects during the data

collection.

To my classmates who helped me collect the data.

To my parents who taught me the value of a good education and silently

encouraged me to accomplish my goals.

To my friends who were always supportive and understanding.

iii

Dedication

For K i m whom I love with all my heart .

I would not have made i t through without her .

Table of Contents

PAGE

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii CHAPTER

I . INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Need for the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Purposes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Null Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Delimitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

I1 . REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Residual Volume Determinations 7 RV Net Compared to RV Dry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Relationship Between Examined Varipbles and Residual Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2

Residual Volume Prediction Formulas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

111 . METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Statistical Treatment of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

IV . RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Comparison of RV Wet to RV Dry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Development of Prediction Formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Comparison of Prediction Formulas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

V . SUMMARY. CONCLUSIONS. AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

REFERENCES CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A . Volunteer Subject Questionna B . Experimental Consent Form ..

. . . . . . . . C . Subject Data Sheets D . Raw Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

List of Tables

TABLE PAGE

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . Characteristics of Test Population 25

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . Correlation Matrix of Variables 26

3 . Statistical Development cf Prediction Formula for Residual Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

4 . Summary of the Development of New Prediction Formula . . . . . . . 29

5 . Development of Prediction Formula for RV Wet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Including Variables 30

. . . . . . 6 . Comparison of Published Formulas to Developed Formula 31

7 . T-Test of Previously Published Prediction Formulas to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Newly Developed Prediction Formula 32

8 . T-Test of Predicted Residual Volume to Measured . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Immersed Volume 33

9 . Characteristics of Test Population from Previously . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Published Studies 34

vii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Various lunk volumes are measured during body composition analysis.

These lung volumes are measured directly or indirectly. Direct methods

include the use of a spirometer which measures the volume of air moved

during either the inspiratory or expiratory phase of the breathing

cycle. Indirect methods include (Wilmore, 1969): 1) pneumatometric

method, using some form of plythysmograph, 2) closed-circuit method,

where there is dilution used and eventual equilibration of an inert

tracer or indicator gas such as nitrogen, helium, or hydrogen, and 3)

, the open-circuit mechod, where nitrogen is "washed out" of the lungs

during a specified period of oxygen breathing.

A spirometer can not measure the volume of air that constantly

remains in the lungs. This volume of air is referred to as residual

volume (RV). An indirect method for measuring RV is required.

Hydrostatic weighing determines body density on the basis of

Archimedes' Principle which states that an object submerged in water

is buoyed up by a counterforce that equals the weight of the water

displaced. Air remaining in the lungs during immersion can have an

effect when attempting to accurately calculate body density. Residual.

volume then must be measured accurately and its effect accounted for to

ensure the most accurate determination of body density.

Water pressure exerts a greater force on the body than atmospheric

pressure. When performing hydrostatic weighing, lung volumes are

a f f e c t e d by the pressure exe r t ed on the tho rac ic c a v i t y . Consideration

t h e r e f o r e , must be given t o the e f f e c t water p re s su re w i l l have on RV

measurement.

peed f o r the Studv

The main purpose of h y d r o s t a t i c weighing is t o o b t a i n a person 's

body d e n s i t y while immersed i n water . Considera t ion must be given to

RV f o r the most accura t e measurement of t h i s d e n s i t y . Since body weight

is obta ined while immersed, i t was reasoned t h a t RV should be a s wel l

i n o rde r t o inc rease the v a l i d i t y of the subsequent c a l c u l a t i o n s .

The i n d i r e c t measurement of RV can be both time consuming and

expensive. I n o rde r t o make RV determinat ion mGre p r a c t i c a l , p red ic t ion

formulas nave been developed t h a t can p r e d i c t RV accura t e ly . The

ma jo r i ty of the p r e d i c t i o n formulas a v a i l a b l e were developed us ing the

measurement of RV determined on land (RV dry ) . They were a l s o developed

s p e c i f i c a l l y us ing male s u b j e c t s . There i s a need, t h e r e f o r e f o r

measurement of RV immersed (RV wet) and f o r us ing female s u b j e c t s . A

pred ic t ion formula could then be developed which would be appropr ia te

f o r the female popula t ion, t ak ing i n t o cons ide ra t ion the e f f e c t immer-

s i o n has on the determined RV.

Purposes

The purposes of t h i s s tudy were t o : 1) demonstrate a need f o r

determining RV wet opposed t o determining RV d ry ; 2 ) perform a t e s t -

r e t e s t c o r r e l a t i o n f o r the c l o s e d - c i r c u i t , oxygen d i l u t i o n technique of

RV wet determinat ion; 3) develop a formula f o r t h e p r e d i c t i o n of RV

wet using smoking history and the strongest physical characteristics of

age, height, weight, chest depth, and chest diameter; and 4) test for

adequacy of prediction formula.

The null hypotheses of this study were:

1. Age, height, weight, chest diameter, chest depth, and smoking

history are not significant predictors of RV in females between ages 10-

56 years.

2. There is no correlation between trials for the closed-circuit

oxygen-dilution technique in determining RV wet.

3 . There is no significant difference between the RV wet

measurement and the RV measurement determined using the formula

developed in this study.

&. There is no significant difference between the prediction of RV

using the developed formula from this study and the prediction of RV

using the formulas developed from previously published studies.

5. There is no significant difference in RV wet and RV predicted

using the previously published formulas.

6 . There is no significant difference between RV wet and RV dry.

Assumptions -

The assumptions of this study were:

1. Ali subjects maximally exhaled during all RV measurements.

2. All subjects were free from cardio-respiratory disease.

3 . The water level for all subjects was at the same anatoc~ical

landmark, which was midway between the chin and the manubrim.

6. All subjects answered the preliminary questionnaire honestly.

Limitations

The limitations of this study were:

1. True randomization was not achieved, as all subjects were

volunteers.

2. A cross-sectional approach was used rattier than a longitudinal

approach.

3. Individual differences in maximal exhalation endpoints for each

residual volume measurement.

Delimitations

The delimitations of this study were as followo:

1. Only female subjects with heights between 150 - 180 centimeters

were tested.

2. Only female sub,jects between the ages of 10-56 were tested.

3. Age, height, weight, chest diameter, chest depth, and smoking

history were the only independent variables examined.

4. The smoking population represented only 12% of the total test

population.

5. Subjects suffering from respiratory dysfunction were screened

out before testing and were excluded from the study.

Def in i t ions o f Terms -

Se lec ted terms f o r the purpose of t h i s s tudy a r e a s follows:

Chronological age determined t o the n e a r e s t y e a r .

Closed-Circui t Oxv~en Di lu t ion -- Rebreathing a measured volume of gas i n a c losed system t o

determir.2 a s p e c i f i c lung vol-me.

Expira torv Reserve Volume (ERVJ

Amount of a i r f o r c i b l y exhaled a f t e r t i d a l volume exp i ra t ion

(McArdLe, Katch & Katch, 1986).

Funct ional Residual Cauacitv ( 7 ? ?

The volume of a i r remaining i n the lungs a t t he end-normal

t e x p i r a t i o n p o s i t i o n (McArdle e t a l . , 1986).

Heieht

Body length % ~ f s u b j e c t ~neasured t o top of head, while s t and ing

ba re foo t

Hvdrosta t ic Weighing

Technique used t o de te rq ine body dens i ty through t o t a l immersion of

the s u b j e c t .

I n s p i r a t o r v Keserve Volume (IRV)

Addi t ional volume of a i r t h a t can be i n s p i r e d above the in sp i r ed

t i d a l a i r volumc (McArdle e t a l . , 1986).

Pack Years of Smoking

Number of packs smoked per day multiplied by the number of years

smoked.

Residual Volume (RVZ

Volume of air remaining in lungs after maximal exhalation (McArdle

et al., 1986).

Spirometer

Device which measures exhaled or inhaled air volume per unit of

time, by recording breathing patterns on a motor driven drum adjacent to

a spirometric cylinder which raises on expiration and lowers on

inspiration.

Vital Capacitv (VC)

Total volume of air that can be voluntarily moved in one breath,

from full inspiration to maximal expiration (McArdle et al., 1986).

CHAPTER I1

RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter will discuss literature reviewed pertinent to this

investigation. Studies that specifically used female subjects were

rare, consequently studies using male subjects were included in the

review of literature discussion.

The development of residual volume determination was examined.

Residual volume determined while subjects were immersed (RV wet) was

contrasted to RV determined while on land (RV dry). Smoking history

and the physical characteristics of age, chest depth, height, weight,

and chest diameter were examined for their relationship to RV. Pre-

viously published prediction formulas (Prev RV) (Crapo et al., 1980:

Goldman & Becklalce, 1959; Grimby and Soderholm. 1963) were reviewed for

both similarities and differences in methodology.

Residual Volume Determination

Sir Humphrey Davy investigated the measurement of lung volume of

man in the early 1800's. He measured his own lung volume through the

use of a hydrogen-dilution method (Boren, Kory & Syner, 1966). Accord-

ing to Boren et al. (1966), Pfluger described a pneumatometric method in I

i 1882. This method used whole body plethysmography in measuring lung

volumes which requires that the subject breathe to the outside of an air

tight chamber through a mouthpiece. Residual volume was calculated by

measuring the change in pressure at the mouthpiece and the volume of

expansion of the thorax.

The beginning of the modern type closed-circuit gas dilution method

was not seen until the early twentieth century. Lundsgaard and Van

Slyke (1918) developed a method in which after maximal exhalation the

subject rebreathed oxygen. The oxygen was mixed wtth the air in the

subject's lungs by respiring from 5 to 7 times. The mixture was ana-

lyzed and the amount of residual air (RV) was "calculated from the degree

to which the air in the chest has diluted the gas in the bag or spiro-

meter" (p. 67).

Van Slyke and Binger (1923) described a hydrogen-dilution method in

which the subjects rebreathed for 5 to 7 minutes to allow for complete

gas mixing. Christie (1932) introduced the quiet breathing oxygen-dilu-

tion technique using hydrogen as an indicator gas. This method was

widely used until McMichael (1939) developed a variation of the hydro-

gen-dilution method. The hydrogen-dilution method was later adapted for

helium by Meneely and Kaltreider (1949).

A nitrogen-dilution method was introduced by Darling, Cournand, and

Richards (1940) in which nitrogen was "washed out" of the lungs. Rahn,

Fenn and Otis (1949) described a nitrogen-dilution method which involved

rebreathing 100% oxygen after maximal exhalation. Residual air (RV) was

calculated from the percent of nitrogen which was found. Wilmore (1969)

proposed a method which was basically a modification of the closed-

circuit oxygen-dilution method reported by Lundsgaard and Van Slyke

(1918).

RV Wet Compared to RV Dry

Many researchers (Crapo, Morris, Clayton, Nixon, 1982; Donnelly et

al, 1988; Timson & Coffman, 1984; Weltman, Janney, Huber, Rians & Katch,

1987) have conducted studies determining RV dry. This value has then

been used in the determination of body density through hydrostatic

weighing, which is necessary for body percent fat calculations. The

question remains whether or not RV dry is an appropriate substitute for

RV wet in the determination of eventual body percent fat calculations.

Arborelius, Balldin, Lila, and Lungren (1972) observed pronounced

changes in central hemodynamics as a result of immersion. Agostoni,

Gurtner, Torri, and Rahn (1966) found that hydrostatic pressure shifted

the blood into the thorax and counteracted the force of the inspiratory

muscles. This shift could be responsible for decreased RV vet values

compared to RV dry values. Craig and Ware (1967) predicted that RV

would be decreased when the subject is immersed due to the increase in

thoracic blood volume. Dahlback and Lundgren (1972) found that immer-

sion reduced the lung volumes by both compression (Agostoni et al.,

1966) and pooling of blood (Arborelius et al., 1972) into the thorax.

They theorized that "several hundred milliliters of blood being redis-

tributed into the thorax might engorge the vessels of the lungs and air-

ways, thus presumably directly promoting obstruction and air-trapping"

(p.768).

Additional studies have been done on the effect immersion has on

volumes. Bondi, Young, Bennett, and Bradley (1976) observed reduced

ventilatory efficisncy as immersion decreased the range in lung

capacities. The authors found that the ''inert gas dilution method used

to measure RV may have given values lower than the actual volume left in

the lungs, since some gas may have been trapped behind closed airways"

(p. 740). In agreement with this finding, Robertson, Engle, and Bradley

(1978) observed that gas was trapped during immersion and consequently,

the dilution method is likely to underestimate RV. They also suggested

that since hydrostatic forces tended to decrease RV and vascular conges-

tion tended to increase RV, there should be no significant change in RV

while immersed due to the counteracting effect.

Numerous researchers (Girandola, Wiswell, Mohler, Romero & Barnes.

1977; Dahlback & Lundgren, 1972; Prefaut, Lupi & Anthonisen, 1976) found

significant decreases in all lung volumes, except RV, due to hydrostatic

pressure. RV seemed to be least affected by hydrostatic pressure and

was thought to be the most appropriate lung volume to use when hydro-

statically determining body density (Thomas & Etheridge, 1980).

Robertson et al. (1978) however, indicated that RV may be affected

by immersion and at the very least, "the effect of immersion on residual

volume is less clear" (p. 681). This finding indicates the potential

need for testing the effect immersion has on RV to a greater extent.

Ostrove and Vaccaro (1982) conducted one of the few studies which

used only female subjects. The results of their study indicated that

there was a significant decrease (gC.01) of 17.4% in RV when comparing

RV wet to RV dry. The effect of the decrease between RV wet and RV dry

corresponded to a mean relative error of only 0.35% when calculating

body density. The authors, therefore recommended that RV determination

be made dry. "This procedure would allow for greater ease in measure-

ment f o r both the s u b j e c t and researcher with rlo l o s s i n physiologic

accuracy" (p . 223).

Robertson e t a l . (1978) conducted a s tudy us ing nine males f o r

determinat ion of RV dry and RV wet. With t h e use of the d i l u t i o n

method, a s i g n i f i c a n t decrease ( ~ < . 0 5 ) of 12% was observed between RV

wet and RV dry. This f ind ing suppor ts t h a t of Ostrove and Vaccaro (1982)

Girandola e t a l . (1977) found immersion t o have a d i f f e r e n t e f f e c t

on RV when determined us ing male s u b j e c t s . They repor ted a s ign iE ican t

i nc rease ( ~ < . 0 1 ) i n RV wet of 6 . 7 % when compared t o RV dry . I t was

thought t h a t poss ibly the inc rease i n RV v a t was due t o the " s t i f f n e s s "

of t he lung t i s s u e caused by pulmonary vascu la r engorgement. Calcula-

t i o n s of body dens i ty and percent body f a t i nd ica t ed s i g n i f i c a n t

, d i f f e rences ( ~ < . 0 1 ) when us ing RV wet compared t o RV dry . From the

r e s u l t s of t he s tudy it was concluded t h a t , "when ob ta in ing body dens i ty

va lues , RV should be measured concurrent ly while the sub jec t i s i n the

water" (p . 276).

Another study us ing male s u b j e c t s was one conducted by Sawka, Weber,

and Knowl'ion (1978). They used the helium d i l u t i o n method f o r

determinat ion of RV wet and RV d ry . They discovered a s i g n i f i c a n t

d i f f e rence ( ~ < . 0 5 ) of 16.2% between RV wet and RV d ry . RV wet showed

a smallc?r value than RV dry . The f ind ings o i t h i s s tudy ind ica t ed t h a t

"RVs obta ined i n a i r were no t a s u i t a b l e s u b s t i t u t e f o r t he measurement

of r e s i d u a l lung volume underwater" (p . 92) . The r e s u l t s from t h i s ! 1 s tudy r e i n f o r c e the importance of measuring RV i n condi t ions i d e n t i c a l

Esteridge and Thornas (1978), measured RV of women in four positions

including seated in air, seated in water, prone in air, and prone in

water. They found RV was not significantly affected by water immersion

or body position. Although the average RV measurenents would support

ttie determination of RV dry in place of RV wet, "for research purposes

there is enough individual and treatment variation to necessitate the

direct determination of lung volumes during the actual underwater

weighing" (p. 61).

It is aprnrent that previously published studies have not

completely agreed on the effect immersion has on RV. As Girandola et

nl. (1977) appropriately stated, "RV is quite variable as a result of

water immersion, with some subjects experiencing a decrease and others

, an increase" (p. 276).

Whether or not it is critical to determine RV wet or RV dry remains

to be seen. Ostrove and Vaccaro (1982) sum it up the best by saying,

"total lack of data with regard to the effect of immersion on RV in

females warrants investigation" (p. 220).

Relationship Between Examined Variables and Residual Volume

Provided below is a review of literature pertaining to smoking

history and selected physical characteristics and their relationship to

RV wet.

Residual Volume and Smokinq

When comparing the regional distribution of young smokers to young

non-smokers, York and Jones (1981) found there was no significant

difference in overall lung function. However, they did report that

RV was significantly higher (gC.05) in the lower lung regions of the

smokers. These results suggest that smokfng does affect the RV.

In a study using identical twins, one of whom smoked and the other

who did not, Webster. Lorimer, Man, Woolf and Zamel (1979) found a dif-

ference in the RV of the smoker compared to the non-smoker, but that it

was not significant (~c.05).

AEe and Residual Volume

Many researchers have investigated the effect age has on RV.

Researchers investigating this effect (Boren et al., 1966; Brozek, 1960;

Crapo et al., 1982; Goldman & Becklake. 1959; Grimby & Soderholm, 1963;

Jones, Overton, Hammerlindl & Sproule, 1978) all concluded that RV

increased with age. Brozek (1960) explained that the increase could

possibly be due to reduced elastic recoil of the lungs and thorax. An I

increase in RV with age involving both the upper and lower lung regions

was observed by Jones et al. (1978).

H~ipht and Residual Volume --

Goldman and Becklake (1959) found that RV correlated significantly

(~c.01) (r-.29) with height. In agreement with these findings, Boren

I et al. (1966) also found a significant (~C.01) (r-.23) relationship

: between RV and height. It was demonstrated that predicted values of

lung volumes could be extended to include persons at the extremes of

stature (Aitken, Schoene, Franklin & Pierson, 1985)

t Wei~ht and Residual Volume ?

Weight was reported as having a significant (~C.01) correlation

(r-.17) with RV in the study of Boren et al. (1966). None of the

previously published studies developing a prediction formula for women

used weight as a variable in the prediction of RV.

Chest Keflsurements and Residual Volume

No studies were found that used either chest depth or chest

diameter measurements in the determination or the prediction of RV.

However, Kory, Callahan, Boren, and Syner (1961) found that chest

expansion (particularly circumferential expansion) related positively

with most of the pulmonary function measurements in their study. Chese

circumference and anteroposterior diameter (fourth costochondral junc-

tion) were measured during maximal inspiration and maximal expiration.

Chest depth and chest diameter were examined in this study because the

author thought some previously unexplained re1ationshi.p existed between

these variables and the prediction of RV.

Residual Volume Prediction Formulas

Prediction formulas have been published in the past by various

authors. This section will discuss those formulas developed using

female subjects.

Crapo et al. (1.982) developed a prediction formula using nonsmoking

female subjects. The physical characteristics used as predictor vari-

ables were age (years) and height (cm) ( R ~ - . 4 8 ) . Measurement of RV

was done using a single breath helium-dilution technique. The standard

error of estimate (S.E.E.) reported was 381 milliliters.

Goldman and Becklake (1959) developed a prediction formula for RV

for women using the physical characteristics of age (years) and height

(cm) as the predictor variables (~~s.30). They derived RV by sub.

tracting expiratory reserve volume (ERV) Prom functional residual

capacity (FRC). ERV was directly measured using spirometry and FRC was

measured using the closed-circuit hydrogen-dilution technique

(McMichael, 1939). The S.E.E. reported was 360 milliliters.

Grimby and Soderholm (1963) developed a prediction formula for

women using age (years) and height (cm) as the predicting physical

2 characteristics to estimate RV (R not reported). Actual RV values

were determined by subtracting ERV (spirometry) Prom FRC (helium-

dilution method). The S.E.E. resulting was 326 milliliters (this was

reported as the "residual standard deviation" - 320 ml).

Summary

A number of methods have been developed for the indirect analysis

of RV. Some methods are a modification of an earlier method and others

use newly developed techniques for determining RV. Common methods

available for measuring RV indirectly include plethysmography, tracer

gas dilution (closed-circuit), and nitrogen washout (open circuit)

(Wilmore, 1969). The closed-circuit oxygen-dilution method seems to

be the most commonly used.

The physical characteristics examined for this study which were

found to significantly correlate with RV were those of age, (Boren et

al., 1966; Brozek, 1960; Crapo et al., 1982; Goldman & Becklake, 1959;

Grimby & Soderholm, 1963; Jones et al., 1978) height, (Aitken et al.,

1985; Boren et al., 1966; Crapo et al., 1982; Goldmn & Becklake, 1959;

Grimby & Soderholm. 1963) and weight, (Boren et al., 1966). Smoking

history was also found to significantly correlate with RV (Boren et al.

1966; Webster e t a l . , 1979; York & Jones , 1981). Chest depth and c h e s t

diameter were r epor t ed a s having a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p with most o f

t he pulmonary func t ion measurements, bu t not a s p e c i f i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t

c o r r e l a t i o n (Kory e t a l . , 1961).

I t is apparent t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s the need f o r determining RV wet.

According t o Robertson e t a l . (1978):

Water immersion caused two inf luences on lung func t ions t o occur: 1) a g rad ien t of h y d r o s t a t i c pressure coun te rac t s t he fo rce of t he i n s p i r a t o r y muscles and deforms the ches t wa l l inward when the muscles a r e r e l axed , and 2 ) blood s h i f t s i n t o the thorax due t o compressive e f f e c t o f the water on the blood v e s s e l s of the e x t r e m i t i e s . (p . 681)

These noted in f luences can have an e f f e c t on RV. Since h y d r o s t a t i c

weighing determines body d e n s i t y while the sub jec t i s immersed, s o too

should RV be determined while t h e s u b j e c t is immersed (Ether idge &

Thomas, 1978; Girandola e t a l . , 1977; Sawka e t a l . , 1978).

Those s t u d i e s which used female sub jec t s determined RV dry .

S tud ies us ing female s u b j e c t s f o r p red ic t ion of RV wet have n o t been

found i n the l i t e r a t u r e . The need e x i s t s f o r f u r t h e r research i n t h i s

a rea . I n conclus ion, it i s apparent t h a t a p r e d i c t i o n formula, t o

e s t ima te RV wat f o r females, i s needed.

CHAPTER 111

METHODS

This chapter d i scusses the procedures used i n ob ta in ing sub jec t s

and tilose phys ica l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of each sub jec t t h a t were t e s t e d .

D e t a i l s of t he instruments used and a d e s c r i p t i o n of each procedure f o r

measuring physical c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a r e a l s o provided.

Subjects

The sub jec t s used i n t h i s s tudy were a l l females r e s id ing i n the

g r e a t e r La Crosse, Wisconsin a r e a . A l l sub jec t s were s o l i c i t e d by

pos t ing informat ion s h e e t s i n var ious es tabl ishments around the c i t y .

As an incen t ive f o r g r e a t e r sub jec t p a r t i c i p a t i o n each sub jec t a l s o had

percent body f a t c a l c u l a t e d us ing the h y d r o s t a t i c weighing technique.

Candidates completed an information ques t ionna i r e ( see Appendix A )

and were randomly ass igned a number from 1-127. S l i p s of paper numbered

1-127 were then c u t and placed i n t o a bowl. The numbers were then r a n -

domly s e l e c t e d and the nviibei corresponding t o the candidate was r .~k - .

with the p i ck of the draw.

From the ranked numbers, the f i r s t 100 s u b j e c t s were s e l e c t e d f o r

t h i s s tudy . I n t h e event t h a t a sub jec t was no t a b l e t o be contacted or

had decided no t t o p a r t i c i p a t e , the next raqked s u b j e c t beyond 100 was

contacted t o keep t h e sample s i z e a t 100.

Sub jec t s used i n t h i s s tudy were of varying ages , he igh t s and body

weights . The age range was from 10 t o 56 years of age (M-25.5, 5018 .4 ) .

17

Instruments

The following is a description of each instrument used during the

test procedures:

pnthro~ome-

A GPM Model 101 Anthropometer was used for height determination in

centimeters.

Chest De~th Cali-

A Sharp & Smith model chest depth caliper was used to determine

chest depth measured in centimeters.

Chest Diameter Cali~ar

A sliding caliper was used to determine chesc diameter measured in

centimeters.

Hvdrostatic Weighing Tank

The hydrostatic weighing tank (Hydrotesting Tank, L.H. Wolfla XI,

Indianapolis, IN) was used to measure RV while the subject was seated

on the hydrostatic weighing chair. A Chatillon scale, suspended from

the ceiling, was attached to the weighing chair which suspended the sub

ject in the water.

Ouestionnaire

A questionnaire was completed by each subject to give information

concerning age, height, smoking history, and cardiopulmonary disease

history.

Residual Volume Apparatus

A closed-circuit oxygen-dilution method (Wilmore, 1969) was used

to measure residual volume. The percent nitrogen in the system was

determined us ing the model 505D ' J i t r a lyzur (Med-Science S t . Louis, MO).

An Omega c h a r t recorder was connected t o the n i t rogen analyzer and

g raph ica l ly recorded n i t rogen f r a c t i o n va lues . A 6 - l i t e r s p i r o ~ n e t e r

(Co l l in s model p-600 6J .E . Bra in t r ee , ElA) was used i n measuring the

moun t of oxygen which was t r a n s f e r r e d i n t o a rubber bag f o r r eb rea th -

ing. The amotmt of oxygen used was usua l ly between 3 and 5 l i t e r s .

Sinele-beam Balance Scale - A Health-0-Meter (Cont inenta l model tt.200 DLK) was used t o determine

the s u b j e c t ' s weight i n kilograms.

S ~ i r o m e t g

A 9 - l i t e r spirometer (Co l l in s Vitalometer) was used i n determining

v i t a l capac i ty .

Proctdures

Upon en te r ing the Human Performance Laboratory a t the Univers i ty of

Wisconsin - La Crosse, each sub jec t was r equ i red t o read the Experi-

mental Consent Form ( see Appendix B ) . A l l procedures were thoroughly

expla ined and a l l ques t ions were answered. Af t e r explanat ion and a

complete reading, a l l sub jec t s were asked t o s i g n the consent form.

They were then reminded of any poss ib l e r i s k s and t h e i r a b i l i t y t o wi th-

draw from the s tudy a t any time.

Subjects were acquainted with the procedures used dur ing t e s t i n g .

I t was hoped each sub jec t would become f a m i l i a r wi th the equipment t o

minimize t e s t i n g e r r o r .

For a l l t e s t i n g procedures, t he sub jec t wore a one-piece bathing

s u i t . The f i r s t p a r t of t he a c t u a l t e s t i n g involved determining the

sub jec t ' s v i t a l capacity. The subject was ins t ruc ted to inhale and

exhale maximally i n t o the 9 - l i t e r vitalometer spirometer. This was done

while wearing a noseclip t o ensure no loss of a i r through the nasal

passages. Two t r i a l s of t h i s procedure were conducted with the higher

of the two values used. Vi ta l capaci ty was measured i n order t o de te r -

mine the amount of oxygen used i n the rubber rebreathing bag during RV

determination. Actual v i t a l capacity was not used a s a var iab le .

Chest depth was measured with a chest depth c a l i p e r . The subject

stood with the r i g h t hand behind the head. One end of the ca l iper was

placed on the t i p of the xiphoid process while the ocher end was placed

over the vertebrae of the twelfth r i b . The measurement was taken a t the

end of a normal expirat ion.

Chest d i m e t e r was measured with a s l i d i n g ca l iper . The subject

stood with both hands on the c r e s t of the ilium. The ca l iper was then

placed i n the a x i l l a r y region with the ends being placed on the second

or t h i r d r i b . A t the end of expirat ion, the measurement was obtained.

A l l chest measurements were recorded t o the nearest 0 .1 centimeter.

Two t r i a l s were conducted with the average of the two being reported.

Residual volune was f i r s t determined while the subject was s i t t i n g

on a cha i r . This was done to obtain RV dry. This data was then

subsequently used t o t e s t f o r s ignif icance between RV wet.

A 6 - l i t e r spirometer b e l l was f i l l e d with approximately 5 l i t e r s of

oxygen by a timed valve. The spirometer and rubber bag were f i l l e d and

emptied a t l e a s t 2 times t o f lush out any gases remaining from previous

t e s t s . A measured amount of oxygen, u sua l ly 3 t o 5 l i t e r s (depending on

s u b j e c t ' s v i t a l capac i ty measurement) was then dispensed i n t o the rubber

bag i n p repa ra t ion f o r r eb rea th ing .

The s u b j e c t was i n s t r u c t e d t o take a few normal b rea ths while

connected t o the n i t rogen analyzer . This was done wi th a nosecl ip and

disposable mouthpiece i n p lace . The sub jec t was i n s t r u c t e d t o inha le

maximally and without h e s i t a t i o n , exhale maximally. The sub jec t was

required t o mainta in con tac t of the mouthpiece with the mouth through-

ou t t h e measuring process . The s u b j e c t s igna led when she f e l t maximal

exha la t ion had been reached. The t e s t e r then immediately switched the

valve a l lowing the s u b j e c t t o r eb rea th the oxygen conta ined i n the

rubber bag.

The s u b j e c t was encouraged t o take deep b rea ths t o ensure adequate 4

mixing of t h e gases . This was continued u n t i l a n i t rogen equi l ibr ium

between t h e s u b j e c t ' s lungs and the r eb rea th ing bag had been achieved.

Absolute equi l ibr ium is never reached, bu t f o r t he purposes of t h i s

s tudy it was assumed t o be reached when the readings were i n d i s t i n -

guishable on the graphic p r i n t o u t . The values obta ined were i n s e r t e d

i n t o Equation 1 (Wilmore, 1969).

BV (EN-IN)

RV - 1.1 x -----.---- - DS

AN - FN Note.

RV - r e s i d u a l v o l m e . BV - amount of oxygen i n r eb rea th ing rubber bag.

AN- pe rcen t of a l v e o l a r n i t rogen . I N - percent of n i t rogen impurity

found i n oxygen conta ined i n rubber bag before r eb rea th ing . EN - per -

cen t of n i t rogen i n the r eb rea th ing bag a t equi l ibr ium. FN - percen t of

n i t rogen found i n the expired a i r a t equi l ibr ium. DS - dead space found

wi th in the n i t rogen analyzer apparatus ( . 081 l i t e r s ) . 1.1 - c o r r e c t i o n

f a c t o r f o r BTPS.

The s u b j e c t ' s he igh t was measured i n cen t ime te r s , with the back

a g a i n s t t h e wa l l and wi th the s u b j e c t ba re foo t . The s u b j e c t ' s weight

was determined i n cen t ime te r s , while ba re foo t and wearing a one-piece

ba th ing s u i t .

The s u b j e c t was i n s t r u c t e d t o e n t e r t he locke r room a rea and take a

shower, wi th the ba th ing s u i t on, i n p repa ra t ion of en te r ing the hydro-

s t a t i c tank. A pre-measurement of t he weighing apparatus with the

s u b j e c t i ~ ~ n e r s e d t o the ch in was determined. This value was used :n

body d e n s i t y c a l c u l a t i o n s .

Residual volume measurements were made while the sub jec t was

immersed, wi th the water midway between the ch in and manubrium, i n the

h y d r o s t a t i c tank. The water temperature was kep t between 32 and 34

degrees Celc ius f o r a l l hydros t a t i c RV measurements. Two t r i a l s were

conducted wi th an adequate break allowed between each one t o e l imina te

any excess oxygen remaining i n the lungs a f t e r r eb rea th ing . A l l r e -

s u l t s were recorded on the graph paper and a l s o on sub jec t d a t a s h e e t s

t he ( see Appendix C ) . An average of the two t r i a l s was used and the

v a r i a b l e was named "wet".

S t a t i s t i c a l Treatment of Data

A l l r e s u l t s were processed through the use of a Zenith d a t a

systems computer us ing the s t ep -wise m u l t i ~ l e r eg res s ion formula

f o r IBM compatible ABSTATS sof tware . A t e s t f o r s i g n i f i c a n t

d i f f e r e n c e s was conducted between RV wet and KV d ry . This was

through the use of a pa i r ed t - t e s t . Each independent v a r i a b l e was 4

t e s t e d f o r i t s e f f e c t on RV wet.

The p r e d i c t i o n formula was developed by s i n g u l a r l y and c o l l e c t -

i v e l y e n t e r i n g v a r i a b l e s i n t o the s tep-wise r eg res s ion formula u n t i l no

s i g n i f i c a n t i nc rease i n R squared occurred. Var iables not adding t o an

inc rease i n R squared were no t included i n the f i n a l developed foralula.

Residual volume der ived from the formulas mentioned i n Chapter I1

was compared t o RV determined through the use of the newly developed

formula. A pa i r ed t - t e s t was used t o t e s t f o r s i g n i f i c a n c e . Pai red

t - t e s t s were used t o compare a l l c i t e d p r e d i c t i o n formulas t o RV.

CHAPTER I V

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A comparison was made between RV wet and RV dry . The i n t e n t of the

comparison was t o determine i f any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e rence (gC.05)

e x i s t e d between t h e two measurements. Processing of the raw da ta was

done through the use of a step-wise mul t ip le regress ion formula. A new

pred ic t ion formula was then developed and i t s adequacy t e s t e d . Residual

volume wet was compared t o RV obtained through the use of the newly

developed formula (New RV). RV wet was a l s o compared t o RV derived

using the formulas discussed i n Chapter I1 (Prev RV). These formulas

were developed using RV dry values t o p red ic t RV. The raw da ta obtained i

from t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n was i n s e r t e d i n t o these formulas t o determine

A t e s t f o r s ign i f i cance was then conducted between New RV and Prev

RV. This was done i n an a t tempt t o determine the p r e d i c t a b i l i t y of RV

using t h e d i f f e r e n t formulas.

Subiects

The s u b j e c t s involved i n the study were females between the ages

of 10-56 years o l d . They were volunteers from the g r e a t e r La Crosse,

Wisconsin a r e a . A t o t a l of 127 sub jec t s volunteered, of which 100

were randomly s e l e c t e d and t e s t e d a s previously descr ibed i n Chapter

111. Table 1 presen t s values f o r RV wet, RV dry, age, h e i g h t , weight,

ches t d iameter , ches t depth , and smoking h i s t o r y .

24

Table 1

Characteristics of Test Population

Variable Mean S.D. S.E. of Mean

- RV dry (L) .95 .25 .02

RV wet (L) .92 .23 .02

Age (yr) 25.60 8.40 .84

Height (cm) 164.01 7.56 .76

Weight (kg) 62.06 11.49 1.15

Chest Diameter (cm) 25.90 2.20 .22

Chest Depth (cm) 17.20 2.00 .20

Smoking History (pk) .82 3.40 .34

Note. Mean smoking value computed for entire test population.

n - 100. pk = pack years.

Comoarison of RV Wet to RV Dry

A paired t-test was performed between RV wet and RV dry revealing a

significant difference (~C.05) between the two measurements. This find-

ing substantiates the need for determining RV wet when using the

measurement in subsequent calculations for body composition assessment.

Develooment of Prediction Formula

The development of the prediction formula was accomplished by

singularly and collectively regressing the physical characteristics on

RV wet. A step-wise multiple regression formula was used for that

process. Specifically, age, height, weight, chnst diameter, chest

depth, and smoking history were eaeh analyzed to determine their

effect on the prediction of RV wet. Table 2 depicts the correlation

matrix of the variables.

Table 2

Correlation Matrix of Variables

Chest Chest Smoking

Wet: RV Age Height Weight Diameter Depth History

Wet RV

6 Age .59

Height .40 .OO

Weight .33 .37 .52

Chest Diameter .17 .20 .44 .73

Chest Depth .43 .26 .31 .63 .20

Smoking History .14 .23 -.07 - .04 - .06 .07

Note. All values rounded to nearest 100th. -

Age showed the highest: correlation to RV wet. Chest depth and

height showed the next highest correlation to RV wet, respectively.

Weight was the only other variable indicating some correlation to RV

wet, (pC.05) with smoking history and chest diameter,not indicating a

correlation. Table 3 illustrates the development of each variable into

t he r eg res s ion formula and Table 4 d e p i c t s a summary oE each s t e p invo l -

ved. Smoking h i s t o r y and ches t diameter were no t included i n the f i n a l

formula due t o no s i g n i f i c a n t (~<.05) improvement i n the va r i ance .

2 8

Table 3

S t a t i s t i c a l Development of Prediction Formula for Residual Volume

Variable B S.E. B BETA T

Step 1

Constant

Step 2

Age

Chest Depth

Constant

Step 3 I

Age

Chest Depth

Height

Constant

Step 4

Age

Chest Depth

Height

Weight

Constant

Table 4

Summary of the Develo~ment of New Prediction Form\&

Step

---- .

Adjusted

R R Square* R Square S.E.E.

1 Age .59 .35 .35

2 Age + CD .66 .43 .42

3 Age + CD + HT . 74 . 5 4 .53

4 Age + C D + HT +WT .78 .60 . 5 9

Note. *R square modified to recognize number of independent variables.

1 Age was fovnd to be the single strongest predictor of RV wet,

explaining 35% of the variance (R square). The variable chest depth

increased the total variance to 43% in combination with age. Adding

the variable height further increased the variance (54%) for predicting

RV wet. The addition of the variable weight explained 60% of the

variance when combined with the three variables previously regressed.

This value ( 6 0 % ) was the largest variance explained after conducting a

step-wise multiple regression with all combinations oE the variables. A

standard error of estimation (S.E.E.) of 148 milliliters resulted Eroln

this developed formula.

Table 5 illustrates the development of the prediction formula using 1 I

1 the four previously mentioned significant variables with their

respective regression coefficient. A break down of cach variable is !

provided as thn use of the step-wise multiple regression formula

ntanipulated each one singularly and collectively.

Teble 5

Development of Prediction Formula for RV Wet Including Variables

Formula R Square S . E. E .

i

Note.

Age - years. CD - chest depth(cm). HT - height(cm). WT - weight(kg). 1 Comparison of Prediction Formulas

The formula developed from this study was compared to the formulas

developed by Crapo et al. (1982) , Goldman and Becklake (1959). and

I Grimby and Soderholm (1963). The formula developed in this study re- I 1 sulted in a lower S.E.E. (148 ml) and a higher multiple correlation

I 2 I coefficient (R =.60) than the previously cited formulas. Table 6 I

depicts the comparison of the published formulas with the formula

developed from this study.

Table 6

Comparison o f Publ ished Forn~ulas t o Deve lo~ed Form*

Formula R~ S . E . E .

Crapo e t a l . (1982)

.0201(Age) + .0197(HT) - 2.421

Goldman & Becklake (1959)

.009(Age) + .032(HT) - 3.90

Grimby & Soderholm (1963)

.007(Age) + .0268(HT) - 3.42

P resen t Study

.0176556(Age)+.0399657(CD)+.0149732(HT)

.00747103(WT)-2.20767

Note. * Not r epo r t ed i n s tudy. ** Value r epo r t ed a s t he " r e s i d u a l

s t anda rd dev ia t ion" - 320 m l .

Age - y e a r s . HT - height (cm). 6Tr - weight(kg) . CD - ches t depth(cm).

The raw d a t a obta ined i n t h i s s tudy were i n s e r t e d i n t o t he p re -

v ious ly publ ished formulas t o p r e d i c t RV (Prev RV). The r e s u l t s from

each fcrmula were compared t o RV der ived through the use of t he newly

developed formula (New RV). Res idual volume ob ta ined us ing the pub-

l i s h e d fcrmulas was then compared t o RV wet. A l l t h r e e previous ly pub-

l i s h e d formulas y i e lded s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t (P2.05) p red ic t ed RV

compared t o New RV. These r e s u l t s a r e provided i n Table 7 .

Table 7

T-test of Previouslv Published Prediction Formulas to Newlv Develooed

Prediction Formula

Author

Standard S tandard

Mean Deviation Error Mean T

-- - -

Crapo et al. (1982) 1.32 .224 .022 43.09%

Goldman & Becklake (1959) 1.58 .253 .025 37.58%

Grimby & Soderholm (1963) 1.15 .211 .021 15.38*

Preserrt Study .92 .I78 .018 - - -

Note. Data from present study was inserted into prediction formulas.

*g<. 05

Results from a paired t-test indicated a significant difference

(g<..OS) between RV wet and Prev RV. The corresponding values of each

RV determined using the prediction formulas reported are provided in

Table 8.

Table 8

T-test of Predicted Residual Vo!.ume to Measured Immersed Vol~une

Author

Standard Standard

Mean Eeviation Error Mean T

Crapo et al. (1982) 1.32 .224 .022 23.23-X

Goldman & Becklake (1959) 1.58 .253 .025 28.88*

Grimby & Soderholm (1963) 1.15 .211 .021 11.05*

Present Study .92 .I78 .018 .OOOO

Measured RV (wet) .92 .230 ,023 - - - -

Note. Data from present study was inserted into prediction formulas. i

*~<.05.

One possible explanation for the noted differences among the

obtained predicted RVs is the characteristics of the population from

which each formula was developed. The previously published formulas

used suLject populations which had a different mean age value than did

the population used during this investigation. This could stress the

importance for using formulas developed on populations of the same sex.

similar height, age, and weight parameters, as the desired test popula-

tion. Table 9 illustrates the population characteristics from each

study .

Table 9

Characteristics of Test Population from Previouslv Published Stud-

Author

Age (~r) Height (cm)

Mean S.D. Mean S.D. n

Crapo et al. (1982) 49.0 * 161.0 7.0 122

Goldman & Becklake (1959) 38.5 16.3 160.9 6.4 50

Grimby & Soderholm (1963) 40.1 13.8 164.C 6.0 5 8

Present Study 25.5 8.4 164.0 7.6 100

Note. *Not reported.

Summary

A formula for predicting RV was developed through the use of a

step-wise multiple regression formula based on the data collected in the

investigation. The formula developed was derived from data gathered

from female subjects, which may limit the use of the formula to only

females falling within the test population parameters. Of the vari-

ables examined, chest diameter and smoking history did not show a signi-

ficant effect in predicting RV and consequently, were not included in

the final developed formula.

2 The square of the multiple correlation (R ) indicates the propor-

tion of the variation in RV attributed to the independent variables in

2 the prediction formula. The R value was used to compare the different

prediction formulas. The newly developed formula had a higher R~ (.60)

than t h a t repor ted by Crapo e t a l . (1982) of .48 and Coldman and Beck-

l ake (1959) of .30. Grimby and Soderholm (1963) d i d not r e p o r t an R 2

value f o r t h e i r formula.

The newly developed formula was unable t o exp la in 40% of the v a r -

iance i n RV. The author thought t h a t poss ibly some phys io log ica l

measurement of b rea th ing muscle c o n t r a c t i l i t y could inc rease the

adequacy of the p r e d i c t i o n formula. Fur ther i n v e s t i g a t i o n is needed a s

t o what v a r i a b l e s may enhance the adequacy of f u t u r e p r e d i c t i o n f o r -

mulas.

The development of t he new formula r e s u l t e d i n a lower s tandard

e r r o r of e s t ima te (148 ml) than t h e formulas developed by Crapo e t a l .

(1982) (381 ml) and Goldman & Becklake (1959) (360 ml). There was a

s i g n i f i c a n t ( ~ < . 0 5 ) d i f f e r e n c e between RV wet and RV dry , n e c e s s i t a t i n g $

t h e measurement of RV wet i n o rde r t o inc rease the v a l i d i t y oE va lues

obta ined.

There was a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e ( ~ < . 0 5 ) between Prev RV and RV

wet. There a l s o was a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e rence ( ~ < . 0 5 ) between Prev RV

and New RV. This f i n d i n g suppor ts t he need f o r us ing a formula t h a t was

developed on a popula t ion s p e c i f i c t o the des i r ed t e s t popula t ion i n

o rde r t o inc rease v a l i d i t y i n p r e d i c t i n g RV. The newly developed f o r -

mula would be most appropr i a t e f o r females between the ages oE 10 to

56 , a s t h i s was t h e range of the t e s t popula t ion age.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The intent of this study was to develop a formula for the predic-

tion of RV. This study was unique in that RV wet measurements were used

in the calculations as opposed to RV dry measurements. Also, all sub-

jects were female.

Summary

A test-retest correlation between the two RV wet measurements

showed a significant correlation with an r of .97 resulting which would

suggest that reliable measurements were taken. 5

A significant difference (g<.05) was found between RV dry and

RV wet which would suggest the need for calculating body density by RV

wet.

The physical characteristics of age, height, weight, chest depth,

and chest diameter were examined through the use of a step-wise

multiple regression process, to develop a prediction formula for RV.

Smoking history did not add any significant (505) predictability to RV,

and therefore was not included in the prediction. This may have been

due to the small percentage of smokers (12%) in the test population.

Chest diameter was also not included because of failure to improve pre-

dictability for RV.

The adequacy of the developed prediction formula was determined by

the square of the multiple correlation coefficient (~~s.60). This value

36

was higher than t h a t i n formulas developed by Crapo e t a l . (1982) and

Goldman and Becklake (1959) (R? -.48 and .30. r e s p e c t i v e l y ) .

The formula developed from t h i s s tudy had a lower s t anda rd e r r o r oE

es t ima te than the previously publ ished formulas. There was a s i g n i f i -

can t d i f f e r e n c e ( ~ < . 0 5 ) between Prev RV and New RV. This f ind ing sup-

p o r t s t h e need f o r us ing a formula t h a t was developed on a popula t ion

s p e c i f i c t o the d e s i r e d t e s t popula t ion i n o rde r t o inc rease v a l i d i t y i n

p r e d i c t i n g RV. A s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e (g<.05) was a l s o found be-

tween Prev RV and RV wet. There was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e ( ~ < . 0 5 )

found between RV wet and New RV which was expected cons ide r ing New RV

was der ived from RV wet.

Equation 2 was the formula developed from t h i s s tudy f o r p r e d i c t i n g

RV . i

RV ( l i t e r s ) - 0.0176556(Age) + 0.0399657(CD) + 0.0149732(HT) - ( 2 )

O,O0747103(WT) - 2.20767

Note. - Age - y e a r s . CD - ches t depth(cm). HT - height(cm). WT -. weight(kg) .

Conclusions

The r e s u l t s o f t h i s s tudy suppor t t he fo l lowing conclus ions:

1. Of the phys ica l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s examined, age , c h e s t dep th ,

h e i g h t , and weight were the b e s t s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s o f RV. The n u l l

hypothesi& was r e j e c t e d .

2. Chest diameter and smoking h i s t o r y were no t s i g n i f i c a n t

p r e d i c t o r s of RV. The n u l l hypothes is could no t be r e j e c t e d .

3 . There was a s ign i f ican t cor re la t ion (~<.05) between t r i a l s f o r

the c losed-c i rcu i t oxygen-dilution technique of RV wet determination.

The n u l l hypothesis was rejected.

4 . There was no s ign i f ican t difference between RV wet and New RV.

The n u l l hypothesis could not be rejected.

5. There was a s ign i f ican t difference between New RV and Prev RV.

The n u l l hypothesis was rejected.

6 . There was a s ign i f ican t difference between RV wet and Prev R V .

The n u l l hypothesis was re jec ted .

7. There was a s ign i f ican t difference between RV wet and RV dry.

The n u l l hypothesis was rejected.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, the fol.lowing recommendations

were made :

1. Develop a prediction formula for RV wet for males.

2. Develop a prediction formula for RV wet for females over the

age of 56 years.

3 . Develop a prediction formula for females at the extremes of

stature.

4. Test for significant differences in RV wet between female

smokers and non-smokers.

5. Test for significant differences in body percent fat values

using RV wet and RV dry, in body density calculations for women.

t 6 . Select other physical characteristics, not already tested, for

examination in the predictability of RV such as the physiology of the

References Cited

Aitken, M.L., Schoene, R.B., Franklin, J. & Pierson, D.J. (1985). Pulmonary functions in subjects at the extremes of stature. American Review of Resuiratorv Diseases. 131, 166-168.

Agostoni, E., Gurtner, G., Torri, G., & Rahn, H. (1966). Respiratory mechanics during submersion and negative-pressure breathing. Journal of Auplied Phvsiolo~v. 21, 251-258.

Arborelius, M., Jr., Balldin, U.I., Lila, B., & Lundgren, C.E.G. (1972). Regional lung function in man during immersion with the head above water. Aerospace Medicine. 43(7), 701-707.

Bondi, K.R., Young, J.M., Bennet, R.M., & Bradley, M.E. (1976). Closing volumes in man immersed to the neck in water. Journal of Applied Phvsioloev. 40(5), 736-740.

Boren, H.G., Kory, R.C., & Syner, J.C. (1966). The veterans administration-army cooperative study of pulmonary function: 11. The lung and its subdivisions in normal men. The American Journal of Medicine. 41, 96-114.

Brozek, J. (1960). Age differences in residual lung volume and vital capacity of normal individuals. Journal of Gerontolorrv&, 155- 160.

Christie, R.V. (1932). The lung volume and its subdivisions. I. Methods of measurement. Journal of Clinical Investipation. 11, 1099- 1118.

Craig A.B., Jr., & Ware, D.E. (1967). Effect of immersion in water on vital capacity and residual volume of the lungs. Journal of Av~lied Phvsiolo~v. 23(4), 423-425.

Crapo, R.O., Morris, A.H., Clayton, P.D., & Nixon, C.R. (1982). Lung volumes in healthy nonsmoking adults. Bulletin of European Phvsio~atholoev of Respiration. 18, 419-425.

Dahlback, G.O., & Lundgren, C.E.G. (1972). Pulmonary air-trapping induced by water immersion. Aerospace Medicine, 43(7), 768-774.

Darling, R.C., Cournand, A., & Richards, D.W. (1940). Studies on the intra pulmonary mixture of gases: 111. An open circuit method for measuring residual air. Journal of Clinical Investigations. 19, 609- 618.

Donnelly, J.E., Brown, T.E., Israel, R.G., Smith-Sintek, S., O'Brien, K.F., & Caslavke. B. (1988). Hydrostatic weighing without head submersion: Description of a method. Medicine and Science in S~orts and Exercise. 20(1), 66-69.

Etheridge, G.L., & Thomas, T.R. (1978). The effect of body position and water immersion on lung volumes of women. Medicine and Science in S~orts and Exercise. 10(1), 61.

Girandola, R.N., Wiswell, R.A., Mohler, J.G., Romero, G.T., & Barnes, W.S. (1977). Effects of water immersion on lung volumes: Implications for body composition analysis. Journal of Applied Phvsiolo~v. 4_2(2), 276-279.

Goldman, I., & Becklake, M.R. (1959). Respiratory function tests: Normal values at median altitudes and the orediction of normal results. American Review of Tuberculosis and Pulmonary Disease, a, 457-467.

Grimby, G., & Soderholm, B. (1963). Spirometric studies in normal subjects: 111. Static lung volumes and maximum voluntary ventilation in adults with a note on physical fitness. Acta Medica Scandinavica. 173, 199-206.

Jones, R.L., Overton, T.R., Hammerlindl, D.M., and Sproule, B.J. 4 (1978). Effects of age on regional residual volume. Journal oE

belied Phvsioloev. 44(2), 195-199.

Kory, R.C., Callahan, R., Boren H.G., Syner, J.C. (1961). The veterans administration-army cooperative study of pulmonary function: I Clinical spirometry in normal men. American Journal of Medicine. 30. 243-258.

Lundsgaard, C., & Van Slyke, D.D. (1918). Studies of lung volume I. Relation between thorax size and lung volume in normal adults. Journal of Exoerimental Medicine, 27, 65-85.

McArdle, W.D., Katch, F.I., & Katch, V.L. (1986). Exercise Phvsiology (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: Lee and Febiger.

McMichael, J. (1939). A rapid method for determining lung capacity. Clinical Science. 4, 167-173.

Meneely, G.R., & Kaltreider, N.L. (1949). Volume of the lung determined by helium dilution. Description of a method and comparison with other procedures. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 28, 129-139.

Ostrove, S.M., & Vaccaro, P. (1982). Effect of immersion on rv in young women" Implications for measurement of body density. International Journal of S~orts Medicine. 3(4), 220-223.

Prefaut, C.. Lupi-h, E., & Anthonisen, N.R. (1976). tluman lung mechanics during water immersion. Journal of ADDlied Phvsiolo~v, @(3), 320-323.

Rahn, H., Fenn, W.O., & Otis, A.B. (1949). Daily variations of vital capacity, residual air, and expiratory reserve including a study of residual air method. Journal of Ao~liod Phvsiolo~v. 1, 725-736.

Robertson, C.H., Jr., Engle, G.M., & Bradley, M.E. (1978). Lung volumes in man immersed to the neck: Dilution and plethysmographic techniques. Journal of A~Dlied Phvsiolo~v, 44(5), 679-682.

Sawka, M.N., Weber, k t . , & Knowlton, R.G. (1978). The effects of total body submersion on residual lung volume aitd body density measurements in man. Eraonomics. 21(2), 89-94.

Thomas, T.R., & Etheridge, G.L. (1980). Hydrostatic weighing at residual volume and functional. residual capacity. Journal of

i AD~lied Phvsioloev. 49(1), 157-159.

Timson, B.F., & Coffman, J.L. (1984). Body composition by hydrostatic weighing at total lung capacity and residual voluma. Medicine and Science in Soorts and Exercise. 16(4), 411-414.

Van Slyke, D.D., & Binger, C.A. (1923). The determinarion of lung volume without forced breathing. Journal of Exoerimental Medicine, 37, 457-470. -

Webster, P. M., Lorimer, E.G., Man, S.F.P., Woolf, C.R. & Zamel, N. (1979). Pulmonary function in identical twins: Comparison of non- smokers and smokers. American Review of Res~iratorv Disease. 119, 223-228.

Weltman, A., Janney, C., Huber, R., Rians, C.B., & Katch, F.I. (1987). Comparison of hydrostatic weighing at residual volume and total lung capacity in pre-pubertal males. Human Biolo~v. 5'?(1), 51-57.

Wilmore, J.H. (1969). A simplified method for determination of residual lung volumes. Lournal of A ~ ~ l i e d Phvsiolo~v. 27(1), 96- 100.

York, E.L. & Jones, R.L. (1981). Effects of smoking on regional residual volumes in young adults. Chest. 79(1), 12-15.

Appendix A

Volunteer Subiect Questionnaire

Name (please print)

Parent or Guardian's Name (if under 18 yrs.)

Address

Telephone Number (home) (work)

Age (at last birthday) Height (total in.)

1. Date of birth (month/day/year)

2 . Do you suffer from any respiratory disorders such as bronchitis,

asthma, or tuberculosis? Y e s No-

3 . Have you ever had heart surgery, experienced a cardiac indicant,

6 or suffered a heart attack? Y e s No--

4. Do you or have you ever smoked? Y e s No-

If yes, how many years have/did you and how many cigarettes per day?

Numbel of Years- Cigarettes/day-

5 . Are you apprehensive about holding your breath while submerged

underwater? Y e s No-

6. Do you suffer from any other conditions that the investigator should

be aware of? If so, please explain.

Appendix B

1, have agreed to voluntarily participate in the residual volume study by being a subject. l'he requirements of the study involve breathing into a spirometer device, while immersed, used for measuring lung volume. This device measures the volume of gas remaining in the lungs after maximal exhalation. I have honestly completed a questionnaire regarding respiratory and cardiac disorders, age, and verifying smoking history. l'he purpose of this study is to determine the correlation between measured residual volume and residual volume determined from the study's prediction formula.

Possible risks of this study may include, light headedness, nausea, possible electrocardiographic (EKG) changes due to forced expiration or slight discomfort due to partial immersion while at the end of a maximal exhalation. Instruments will be sterilized and cleaned prior to subsequent trials, but the possibility of infection always exists.

I have read the above information and fully understand the procedures. I am aware of the possible risks and I am free to withdraw at any time.

By signing this document, I give my informed consent. In doing so I hereby release the University of Wisconsin - La Crosse, the Human Performance Laboratory employees and students involved in the evaluation process from any and all legal liability associated with the above described procedures.

To my knowledge, I am not limited by any condition(s) that would affect my ability to participate in this study.

Signed Date

Witness Date -

1, (parent or guardian) of the above-named subject have read the experimental consent form and do hereby consent to said procedure.

Signed Witness

Appendix C

Subiect Data Sheets

Subject's Name Age - Sex

Tester's Name Date -

Reason for Test

Vital Lung Capacity: #1 liters #2 liters i

Residual Volume Data Dry Wet #1 Wet#2

Sag Volume of Oxygen (BV) L L--..-- L

Alveolar Nitrogen (AN) % % -- %

Impurity Nitrogen (IN) % -- % - % 6

Equilibrium Nitrogen (EN) % % - % %

Final Nitrogen (FN) % % - - %

Anthropometry - Subject in one piece bathing suit.

Dry Weight - kg

Height cm

Chest Diameter #1 cm #2 cm

Chest Depth #1 cm #2 cm

Densitometry - Subject immersed in hydrostatic weighing tank.

Immersed Weight of Apparatus (MY) kg

Water Temperature C

Immersed Weight of Subject and Apparatus (MX) (heaviest)

Trial #1 Trial #2 Trial #3 Trial #4

I I

I

SUBJECT NUMBER 001 002 003 004 005

! 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 1 014 015 016

018

023 2 024 9 025 $ 026

030 031 032 033 034 035 036

Appendix D

Raw Data -.-

DRY VET1 WET2 RV RV RV

1 . 1 5 1 .12 1 .18 0 .71 0 .69 0.70 0 .93 0.80 0.65 1 .12 1 .02 1 .00 0 .57 0 .54 0 .54 0 .79 0 . 7 1 0 . 7 1 0 .73 0 .72 0.69 0 .89 0 . 8 3 0 .81 0 .94 1 . 0 1 0 .97 0 . 9 5 0.82 0 .82 0 .77 0 .85 0 .86 1 . 0 7 1.07 1.11 0.70 0 . 5 2 0.55 1 .32 1 .25 1 .22 1 .04 0 .97 0.88 0 .84 0 . 8 3 0 .85 0 .93 0 .86 0 .83 0 .77 0.77 0.77 0 .76 0 .69 0.70 0 .85 0 . 8 3 0 .81 0.56 0 .58 0.55 0 . 7 5 0 . 6 9 0 .68 0 .90 0 . 9 3 0 .99 0 .88 0 .89 0 .93 0 .89 0 .86 0.89 1 . 1 4 1 . 1 3 1 .12 0 .93 0.92 1 .13 0 .70 0 .84 0 .79 0 .92 0 .92 0 .95 1 . 4 7 1 .42 1 . 5 1 0.65 0 .67 0 .64 1 .12 0 .99 0.99 1.02 1 . 0 0 0 .93 1 . 6 4 1 .50 1 .69 0.70 0 .67 0 .67 0 .91 0 . 9 1 0 .89 1 .10 1 .34 1 . 1 0 0 .88 1 .42 1 .26 1 . 1 8 1 . 1 3 0 .96 0 .56 0 .62 0.67 0 .82 0.80 0 .82